Frequency on Q to increase (SAS)

[checkmatechamp13]

The trains were crowded prior to SAS and they didn't give a crap.  Now suddenly that the runs via SAS, the service is MUCH better.... 

 

I mean, do you prefer reliable service or unreliable service?

 

I'm with VG8... people complained about poor headways and got "we can't do anything to fix it" but now that the UES gets a new line more trains are to be sent there to relieve crush loads?

 

What about riders north of 125 that have to wait for three trains to pass before they can fit, or riders in Brooklyn waiting 8-10 minutes during AM peak and still having to contort awkwardly to fit in an overcrowded train?

 

Why does UES get more equipment when they have an alternative three blocks away ( ) when others who could use more service don't?

 

Gubernatorial campaign donors live on the UES.

 

The has the as alternatives south of 145th, as well as the train a few blocks away.

 

Not everything is a conspiracy, and these two additional trips are not just for the UES.

 

Well, to be fair, the reason those trips are being added is to address crowding on the UES, but yes, riders throughout the line can take advantage of the extra service.

 

The increase is quite minor so I wouldn't make a big deal of it however I've always had the sense that the MTA shows favortism towards the UES. How in the wealthiest neighborhood in the country does every single subway and local bus service running through it have high frequencies? That doesn't sound right given the transportation culture in the US. The combine for 2 minute peak headways, the has 2-3 minute peak headways, the M79, 86 and 96 all have peak headways under 5 minutes, the M15 SBS has 3 minute headways in the AM, M101/102/103 combine for good headways and you have the load of bus service along Madison/5th. With all of that the MTA still finds a way to throw in an extra in each direction to benefit UES commuters more than Brighton ones. 

 

Well, what's the population density on the UES? Pretty high. I mean, it's not like the buses/trains are empty. The Lexington Avenue Line as you know (especially coming from The Bronx) is at capacity. The buses run a little more frequently, but there's fewer trains overall compared to the UWS, which has a similar population density.

 

The percentage of autoless households is as high as other parts of Manhattan, so it's not like there's no ridership to support the service: https://censusreporter.org/data/table/?table=B08201&geo_ids=16000US3651000,160|05000US36061,140|16000US3651000&primary_geo_id=16000US3651000

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The increase is quite minor so I wouldn't make a big deal of it however I've always had the sense that the MTA shows favortism towards the UES. How in the wealthiest neighborhood in the country does every single subway and local bus service running through it have high frequencies? That doesn't sound right given the transportation culture in the US. The combine for 2 minute peak headways, the has 2-3 minute peak headways, the M79, 86 and 96 all have peak headways under 5 minutes, the M15 SBS has 3 minute headways in the AM, M101/102/103 combine for good headways and you have the load of bus service along Madison/5th. With all of that the MTA still finds a way to throw in an extra in each direction to benefit UES commuters more than Brighton ones.

 

To add to that, it's absurd that the considered the a supplementary line when it runs solo in a good portion of Brooklyn on weekends.

[LTA1992]

I read some of these complaints and all I can think is "What have you people learned in the years of being members here?". There is no favoritism as stated. The lines have operational limits. Naturally, a service now free of the some of the most constraining portions of the system can run better service.

 

Sent from my N9560 using Tapatalk

[LongLiveRock]

Not to go off-topic but, how was the Lexington Av line before the SAS line? 

 

 

Miserably crowded during rush hour, with less-than-stellar service and plenty of delays.

 

 

The increase is quite minor so I wouldn't make a big deal of it however I've always had the sense that the MTA shows favortism towards the UES. How in the wealthiest neighborhood in the country does every single subway and local bus service running through it have high frequencies? That doesn't sound right given the transportation culture in the US. The combine for 2 minute peak headways, the has 2-3 minute peak headways, the M79, 86 and 96 all have peak headways under 5 minutes, the M15 SBS has 3 minute headways in the AM, M101/102/103 combine for good headways and you have the load of bus service along Madison/5th. With all of that the MTA still finds a way to throw in an extra in each direction to benefit UES commuters more than Brighton ones. 

 

 

I won't deny that that's probably part of it, but the UES is the highest population-density neighborhood in Manhattan, if not the city, and that would probably play a big part in this as well? It makes sense that you'd run frequent service where the most people live...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I read some of these complaints and all I can think is "What have you people learned in the years of being members here?". There is no favoritism as stated. The lines have operational limits. Naturally, a service now free of the some of the most constraining portions of the system can run better service.

 

Sent from my N9560 using Tapatalk

The constraints have nothing to do with trains running according to schedule which waa my main complaint and why I said what I said. If they were running according to the schedule I wouldn't complain but they weren't and that's the problem. The constraints should've been built into the schedule. I'm sure they've done that now based on how much more prompt the trains are on weekends.

[IAlam]

The constraints have nothing to do with trains running according to schedule which waa my main complaint and why I said what I said. If they were running according to the schedule I wouldn't complain but they weren't and that's the problem. The constraints should've been built into the schedule. I'm sure they've done that now based on how much more prompt the trains are on weekends.

The problem was Astoria was and still isn't good at dispatching train on time. Back when the used to run to Astoria, I'd take it to school every morning. You always did get 6 trains per hour as scheduled, but when they came, was random. Gaps between and could be a mush as 12 Min on the high end and right behind the other on the low end. But aways 6 trains per hour for each line. Part of it had to blame with the merge at 34th because the trains were no longer coming in every five minutes. More like 3min and then 7min and that's how they would leave Astoria too. The problem on most days is that they could dispatch them 5 min apart like they were supposed to. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The problem was Astoria was and still isn't good at dispatching train on time. Back when the used to run to Astoria, I'd take it to school every morning. You always did get 6 trains per hour as scheduled, but when they came, was random. Gaps between and could be a mush as 12 Min on the high end and right behind the other on the low end. But aways 6 trains per hour for each line. Part of it had to blame with the merge at 34th because the trains were no longer coming in every five minutes. More like 3min and then 7min and that's how they would leave Astoria too. The problem on most days is that they could dispatch them 5 min apart like they were supposed to.

 

I find it appalling that they couldn't have more reliable service on Saturday mornings to Brooklyn, especially given how infrequent the trains were. If you can't run trains as scheduled, every ten minutes then that means the schedule needs to be reworked. I get the issue during the week... Train traffic etc., but they'd pull that crap early during the weekend too. I just find that when the wants to tout something as a success then they find a way to make service reliable. It's called providing half @ssed service.

[Bosco]

While I am cynical about the influence of politics in mass transit, you people are acting as if the all of a sudden will be running every 4 minutes at rush hour.  If you read the proposal, you'd see that only two trips are being added in total--hell, when they upped off-peak service on the , it was way more than that.  And has been discussed, the 2010-2016 Broadway service sucked and prevented service from being added; and the R179s should finally be in by the time this all happens.

Furthermore, as someone who lives off the Brooklyn end of the line, the could use a few extra trips.  The regularly become SRO after Kings Highway at the peak of the morning rush hour.  So this is also to the benefit of Brooklyn riders like myself.  Just be happy they're adding service in the first place.

[checkmatechamp13]

Furthermore, as someone who lives off the Brooklyn end of the line, the could use a few extra trips.  The regularly become SRO after Kings Highway at the peak of the morning rush hour.  So this is also to the benefit of Brooklyn riders like myself.  Just be happy they're adding service in the first place.

 

Those Brooklyn riders benefitting from this particular increase are reverse-peak riders (those who need to go to Manhattan in the PM rush).

[Far Rock Depot]

I love how there's a "conspiracy" that now the Q goes to the UES. They. Can send more trains on the Q. As a former conductor (and use to work jobs out of Astoria) I can tell you FOR A FACT that since the Q doesn't have to share terminal tracks on either end is why they can add two more trips to the schedule! Its not political (looking at you VG8) bit a matter of operational logistics. Astoria is a conga line! Trains are literally in and out so quick we usually never had the chance to program the train until Astoria blvd. Crews sometimes wound up boarding the wrong trains at first only to be told that the other crew has that train and to change it over (from N to Q or vice versa). Trust me on that! (I have an amusing story to go along with that!). The fact is, since the Q uses its own tracks at CI and now has a northern terminal all to itself it can now allow more trains during peak times. And technically, when heading south bound in the AM, its not "reverse commuting until you get to lower Manhattan. But what do I know? I'm just a former employee.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[Via Garibaldi 8]

While I am cynical about the influence of politics in mass transit, you people are acting as if the all of a sudden will be running every 4 minutes at rush hour. If you read the proposal, you'd see that only two trips are being added in total--hell, when they upped off-peak service on the , it was way more than that. And has been discussed, the 2010-2016 Broadway service sucked and prevented service from being added; and the R179s should finally be in by the time this all happens.

Furthermore, as someone who lives off the Brooklyn end of the line, the could use a few extra trips. The regularly become SRO after Kings Highway at the peak of the morning rush hour. So this is also to the benefit of Brooklyn riders like myself. Just be happy they're adding service in the first place.

I don't think the frequencies are the issue. The issue has been reliability. If a train is scheduled every ten minutes that is very reasonable, but if it isn't coming every ten minutes then that's a different story. I don't care how frequently scheduled a train is. If it's coming late, you're not benefiting from whatever that frequency is. All I know is service has been noticeably more reliable since it started via Second Avenue and I don't see why that wasn't possible before on weekends early in the morning at that. No, I'm not thankful for the added service. We're paying for it. It isn't free. They should be running service to meet demand as a standard.

[LongLiveRock]

I don't think the frequencies are the issue. The issue has been reliability. If a train is scheduled every ten minutes that is very reasonable, but if it isn't coming every ten minutes then that's a different story. I don't care how frequently scheduled a train is. If it's coming late, you're not benefiting from whatever that frequency is. All I know is service has been noticeably more reliable since it started via Second Avenue and I don't see why that wasn't possible before on weekends early in the morning at that. No, I'm not thankful for the added service. We're paying for it. It isn't free.

 

 

A) The reliability is because of the better terminal, how hard is that to understand

 

B) That added service is helping a lot of people

 

C) The people paying the most for said added service is the Upper East Siders, since as someone said higher up, we're one of the richest neighborhoods, and thus pay the most taxes.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

A) The reliability is because of the better terminal, how hard is that to understand

 

B) That added service is helping a lot of people

 

C) The people paying the most for said added service is the Upper East Siders, since as someone said higher up, we're one of the richest neighborhoods, and thus pay the most taxes.

A. As I said, if they couldn't meet 10 minute headways consistently then they should've revised the schedule. How hard is that to understand. If a train can't make ten minute headways on a Saturday morning that's a problem, I don't care what the set up is. That's inexcusable in 2017. No excuse for it.

 

B. Yes, but let's not act like the wasn't used prior to it running via 2nd Avenue. Both to and from Brooklyn on weekends the train is quite crowded. Now it is just packed like rush hour.

 

C. What a joke. The Upper East Side is one of MANY affluent areas in NYC, so please spare me with that nonsense. In fact numerous parts of Brooklyn are just as affluent these days if not more when compared to the UES. Park Slope sure as hell is expensive and received pretty shabby service prior to the running via SAS, and while we're on the topic, a good portion of the delays we're on the Brooklyn side, not at 57th Street. I'm specifically talking about WEEKENDS, not weekdays when the ran to Astoria.

[LongLiveRock]

A. As I said, if they couldn't meet 10 minute headways consistently then they should've revised the schedule. How hard is that to understand. If a train can't make ten minute headways on a Saturday morning that's a problem, I don't care what the set up is. That's inexcusable in 2017. No excuse for it.

 

B. Yes, but let's not act like the wasn't used prior to it running via 2nd Avenue. Both to and from Brooklyn on weekends the train is quite crowded. Now it is just packed like rush hour.

 

C. What a joke. The Upper East Side is one of MANY affluent areas in NYC, so please spare me with that nonsense. In fact numerous parts of Brooklyn are just as affluent these days if not more when compared to the UES. Park Slope sure as hell is expensive and received pretty shabby service prior to the running via SAS, and while we're on the topic, a good portion of the delays we're on the Brooklyn side, not at 57th Street. I'm specifically talking about WEEKENDS, not weekdays when the ran to Astoria.

 

 

And this change doesn't affect weekend service, so why is that relevant?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

And this change doesn't affect weekend service, so why is that relevant?

It's quite relevant because it's interesting that service was so unreliable running only to 57th Street previously on weekends as opposed to now when it has to run for four more stops. I remember when the new trains first came to the and weekend service was perfect. I still lived along the line at the time. You could also set your watch to it. Then something happened and the line went to crap and remained that way until it was extended to 96th Street. I have to think that it must be timers or something. In short, the attention that the line is receiving now overall and especially on weekends should've been the same prior to the extension.

 

Weekdays I don't care about and never was what I was talking about. Just weekends.

I love how there's a "conspiracy" that now the Q goes to the UES. They. Can send more trains on the Q. As a former conductor (and use to work jobs out of Astoria) I can tell you FOR A FACT that since the Q doesn't have to share terminal tracks on either end is why they can add two more trips to the schedule! Its not political (looking at you VG8) bit a matter of operational logistics. Astoria is a conga line! Trains are literally in and out so quick we usually never had the chance to program the train until Astoria blvd. Crews sometimes wound up boarding the wrong trains at first only to be told that the other crew has that train and to change it over (from N to Q or vice versa). Trust me on that! (I have an amusing story to go along with that!). The fact is, since the Q uses its own tracks at CI and now has a northern terminal all to itself it can now allow more trains during peak times. And technically, when heading south bound in the AM, its not "reverse commuting until you get to lower Manhattan. But what do I know? I'm just a former employee.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

Please read my responses thoroughly and you'll understand why I'm saying what I'm saying.

[deskjockey]

It's quite relevant because it's interesting that service was so unreliable running only to 57th Street previously on weekends as opposed to now when it has to run for four more stops. I remember when the new trains first came to the and weekend service was perfect. I still lived along the line at the time. You could also set your watch to it. Then something happened and the line went to crap and remained that way until it was extended to 96th Street. I have to think that it must be timers or something. In short, the attention that the line is receiving now overall and especially on weekends should've been the same prior to the extension.

 

Weekdays I don't care about and never was what I was talking about. Just weekends.

Please read my responses thoroughly and you'll understand why I'm saying what I'm saying.

Wasn't there quite a bit of reconstruction work on the Brighton Line on weekends in 2016?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Wasn't there quite a bit of reconstruction work on the Brighton Line on weekends in 2016?

I rode the line on weekends during the construction. It was painful yes, but no worse than the service we've been having prior to the line running via 2nd Avenue. I will be seeing how the service rates on weekends versus before in terms of reliability and how long it takes. It used to take roughly 45 minutes. Now it takes about 01:15 or more going the same distance on weekends.

[Bosco]

Just a reminder that many of you who are quick to jump to "politics" also complained when the R62As returned to the ... Politics didn't stop that swap from happening.

[Jemorie]

I love how there's a "conspiracy" that now the Q goes to the UES. They. Can send more trains on the Q. As a former conductor (and use to work jobs out of Astoria) I can tell you FOR A FACT that since the Q doesn't have to share terminal tracks on either end is why they can add two more trips to the schedule! Its not political (looking at you VG8) bit a matter of operational logistics. Astoria is a conga line! Trains are literally in and out so quick we usually never had the chance to program the train until Astoria blvd. Crews sometimes wound up boarding the wrong trains at first only to be told that the other crew has that train and to change it over (from N to Q or vice versa). Trust me on that! (I have an amusing story to go along with that!). The fact is, since the Q uses its own tracks at CI and now has a northern terminal all to itself it can now allow more trains during peak times. And technically, when heading south bound in the AM, its not "reverse commuting until you get to lower Manhattan. But what do I know? I'm just a former employee.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

sorry for going off-topic, but I just wanted to ask if this also applies to the and too?

[Far Rock Depot]

sorry for going off-topic, but I just wanted to ask if this also applies to the and too?

I only worked the B division so I'm not sure. But I know that Flatbush has assigned tracks one for the 2 and one for the 5

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[Italianstallion]

 I'm specifically talking about WEEKENDS, not weekdays when the ran to Astoria.

 

Now you are, but your first post was griping about the weekday rush increase in frequency.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Now you are, but your first post was griping about the weekday rush increase in frequency.

I don't use the much at all during the week if at all, so it is really about two things. The overall attention to the line versus before and the reliability on weekends when it didn't terminate in Astoria but rather 57th street. I don't think there's any conspiracy. I just think the line should've received the same attention before that it's getting now, regardlessly of the circumstances, not necessarily in terms of frequencies, but reliability, especially on weekends. The times that I have used the during the week, it's been for short distances and generally I have not had issues.

[Bosco]

Those Brooklyn riders benefitting from this particular increase are reverse-peak riders (those who need to go to Manhattan in the PM rush).

 

True, but I have seen many reverse commuters on the as of late.  Not to mention that it indirectly helps peak riders as well.  More service means it's a little less likely that a train will be late going to Coney Island.  If a train is late getting to the terminal, that means it's late on the return trip, and so forth.

 

 

I don't use the   much at all during the week if at all, so it is really about two things. The overall attention to the line versus before and the reliability on weekends when it didn't terminate in Astoria but rather 57th street. I don't think there's any conspiracy. I just think the line should've received the same attention before that it's getting now, regardlessly of the circumstances, not necessarily in terms of frequencies, but reliability, especially on weekends. The times that I have used the   during the week, it's been for short distances and generally I have not had issues.

 

I agree that reliability has gone down across the board, and the MTA's own data shows that regularity has been dropping on most lines.  That said, it's been said at least five times already that the could not see an improvement in service until SAS opened.  Just because a line isn't getting more service doesn't mean the MTA wouldn't want that.  Hell, most reasonable MTA workers just want what we want: to get from A to B safely, reliably, and for once, on time.

[IAlam]

I don't use the much at all during the week if at all, so it is really about two things. The overall attention to the line versus before and the reliability on weekends when it didn't terminate in Astoria but rather 57th street. I don't think there's any conspiracy. I just think the line should've received the same attention before that it's getting now, regardlessly of the circumstances, not necessarily in terms of frequencies, but reliability, especially on weekends. The times that I have used the during the week, it's been for short distances and generally I have not had issues.

What really made (and still does) the are all the junctions that is has to cross over. SAS helped by removing the choke point at Prince St. and to some degree between Times Sq and Herald Sq.(It really just switch the direction of the chokepoint.) Most of the delays on the however come from the Dekalb, trains getting on and off the bridge seem to never get priority. 

[Fresh Pond]

I only worked the B division so I'm not sure. But I know that Flatbush has assigned tracks one for the 2 and one for the 5

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

And even still a would come into the terminal in the side and go back out as a sometimes lol